Dr. Shiva, MIT Biologist, On Covid-19

Dr. Shiva is a scientist in the field of biological sciences at MIT and is also a hopeful for a seat in the 2020 Massachusetts senate race on the republican side.

Give a listen to what this guy has to say about the Corona virus and about the “powers that be,” how they’re handling this, and what things look like when you follow the power and the money.

He gives an excellent rundown on the closest thing to a good “conspiracy theory” without theorizing. He just gives the facts. Plain and simple facts.

Read More

Did The World Health Organization Change The Definition Of Herd Immunity?

If you’ve read my posts here much before, you’ll know that I’ve documented elsewhere on this site their ties at the top with Communist ideology. And it is frightening where that could go. But I’ve seen many posts lately on some of my more favoured sites out there, asking the question, “did WHO change the definition of herd immunity,” and “did WHO change the definition of pandemic?”

Although I’m not a fan of the World Health Organization, I think this one isn’t as clear-cut as the conspiracy theorists believe it is.

First, the takeaway:

  • I think the World Health Organization is headed up by a communist sympathizer (which I’ve written about elsewhere).
  • I’m not surprised that “the powers that be” at the WHO are on the same track to get everyone in the world vaccinated as are Bill Gates, Fauci and all the newly-minted billionaires out of this crisis and the Covid vaccine as the only way out.
  • I don’t see that in this case, the WHO has done anything underhanded to “change the definition of herd immunity” in some clandestine way, hoping people won’t notice.
  • I think they are misguided at best and possibly somewhat malevolent in their approach to the best ways to deal with the covid issue (although I can’t prove this, though it sure seems like it).
  • As Christians we need to be very careful about saying “that is what they are doing” as opposed to what we maybe more often should be saying, such as “I believe that is what they are probably doing,” or, “I have to be open to the possibility that is what they are doing”
  • When we say “that’s it” as opposed to “that sure looks like it” we damage our credibility and our witness.
  • Real, careful thinking (the “cognitive man” approach) requires careful thought, the need to not jump to conclusions without knowing instead of suspecting and also, sometimes, having to say I don’t know.

Now, for “the rest of the story….”

Just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

I see a lot of articles documenting (very well) the constantly changing landscape of recommendations from the WHO, the CDC, the AMA and various other governing bodies in different countries. Quite honestly, it seems there is a lot of story-changing and backtracking going on.

For instance, at the “The Liberty Daily” website, author J D Rucker writes about the shifting sands of recommendations from the WHO on whether or not children should be vaccinated.

Many of us, especially on “the right” see some rather sinister looking things happening with changing recommendations and silencing of competing views on the rightness or wrongness of pushing the vaccines as the only answer.

I think there are competing worldviews at work here in the different articles I read regarding this subject. For instance, from “my side” of the conspiratorial fence, I see a lot of mentions of a “change in definition of herd immunity” that supposedly happened on the World Health Organization website.

As an example, I’m going to take a “deep dive” into one article I came across over at Medium. It’s written by Tara, self-described as a “Resolute over-thinker, introvert, eternal optimist, recovering procrastinator, unashamed nerd.” (You can follow her at “All’s Write With The World.”)

Tara makes some interesting points. And I think her concerns that she raises resonate with me. I believe, as it seems she believes, that the Covid vaccines are now more dangerous than the virus. It seems that there is probably not much left anymore of the original Covid strain and all that are left are the many variants that have sprung up.

And I also believe that, as most of these things go, this would be better treated these days by an emphasis on vitamins C, D and zinc with the ability for doctors to freely prescribe ivermectin and hydroxichloroquine as needed. I’m not a doctor but I see many (and ever more recently) advocating for this choice in treating patients, yet often denied the right to do so by bureaucracies of all sorts.

But the specific question is, “did the WHO change their definition of herd immunity to push their agenda of global vaccination?”

Tara notes the following from the WHO website:

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the methods to obtain herd immunity used to be found on this web page. The page, titled Coronavirus Disease (Covid-19): Serology and dated 9 June, 2020, can be found on the Web Archive (Wayback Machine):

Now compare this with the explanation currently on the same page as of 13 November, 2020. (

And Tara asks, “What happened to that other part? You know, the part about herd immunity being developed through previous infection?” Furthermore, they state that “Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.”

Ok. I see the change. It is fair to question this.

Again, where’s the acknowledgement that herd immunity can be, and has been, established through previous infection? The WHO not only chooses to ignore one of the main methods of achieving herd immunity, it also asserts some deceitful claims, if not flat out lies. For example: “Vaccines train our immune systems to develop antibodies, just as might happen when we are exposed to a disease but — crucially — vaccines work without making us sick.”

She has several good points. The vaccines are apparently making A LOT of people sick. And according to some immunologists looking at the numbers, the risk of injury or death from the vaccine is now worse than the risks from getting covid.

Now here’s the jump….

In conclusion, the author asks, “Why would the WHO change the definition of herd immunity to completely ignore the other major half of it? Well, other than pushing the narrative that the experimental Covid-19 vaccine is the only way to save humankind from the Corona virus.”

I get the complaint. But here’s the problem. They didn’t actually “change” the definition of herd immunity.

As a matter of fact, I’m just going to copy a screenshot, right here, from the WHO website, right now, at June 24th, 2021. It is still there…..

Read it for yourself. “‘Herd Immunity,’ also known as ‘population immunity.’ is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infections.”

Their point, though (although I’m skeptical they have it right, for reasons that others note) is, “WHO supports achieving ‘herd immunity’ through vaccination, not by allowing a disease to spread through any segment of the population, as this would result in unnecessary cases and deaths.”

Questioning the wisdom of these vaccines is a fair thing to do, with all the injuries reported. But saying they are “changing the definition” to hit an agenda isn’t dealing fair with the facts.

They’re not changing the definition of herd immunity. They’re explaining why they think people are better off with the vaccine rather than the disease.

An ever-increasing number of immunologists think they are wrong. I get that, too, and from my limited perspective, I’d rather take my chances with Covid and zinc, D and ivermectin than I would ever want to have to take my chances with the vaccine.

But saying they are changing their definitions when they’re not is intellectually dishonest.

Look, I get the frustration. The American Institute for Economic Research posted an article expressing the frustrations we’ve all been dealing with on this issue.

Coronavirus lived on surfaces until it didn’t. Masks didn’t work until they did, then they did not. There is asymptomatic transmission, except there isn’t. Lockdowns work to control the virus except they do not. All these people are sick without symptoms until, whoops, PCR tests are wildly inaccurate because they were never intended to be diagnostic tools. Everyone is in danger of the virus except they aren’t. It spreads in schools except it doesn’t. 

On it goes. Daily. It’s no wonder that so many people have stopped believing anything that “public health authorities” say. In combination with governors and other autocrats doing their bidding, they set out to take away freedom and human rights and expected us to thank them for saving our lives. At some point this year (for me it was March 12) life began feeling like a dystopian novel of your choice. 

True. And so far, so good. But they, too, say this definition was removed from the WHO website, with conclusions as to why they did it….

But it wasn’t removed. And they even explain why they are making the change in emphasis – which is because, in the WHO’s mind, you’re better off with the vaccine than the disease.

So they’re not saying herd immunity doesn’t happen with people getting exposed to the disease, but only from the vaccine. They’ve not “changed the definition.” They’re only wanting people to see why they think the vaccine is wise.

And if we aren’t careful to see what is actually being said and instead jump on the memes that support our preconceptions, without proper homework, we just exchange one problem for another.

I fell for this, too. I saw this meme on facebook, and thought it sure fit the bill.

It is two different links, from two different pages, both still up there. And it’s an inaccurate meme to reinforce a presupposition that these people can’t be trusted.

But it’s based in disinformation. And the ends don’t justify the memes.

This particular attack on what they are doing doesn’t help our credibility in the end.

Can they be trusted? I’m not convinced. But does this way of glossing over the fact that these are two entries, still both on their website, on different pages, help us to get people to see it?

It only helps the preaching to the choir. But it isn’t going to do anything but destroy our credibility with the very people we still need to reach.

Pick your battles, do your homework, be humble and say “maybe” instead of jumping to conclusions all the time. We will all be better off for it.

Read More

NIH Article Condemns The Campaign For mRNA Vaccines As Worst Medical Disaster Ever In Vaccines.

National Institute of Health Article condemns the propaganda war that falsely promoted safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines.

In one of the most damning articles I have yet seen to date, retired neurosurgeon R. L. Blaylock ripped into Pfizer, Moderna, the CDC and the NIH among others, voicing concern over what he reports to be an unmitigated medical disaster in the recent vaccine technology (with much documentation to support his claims.

So, what is the truth?

The reason this article is so curious is that it is actually published on the NIH website. Considering what a job the NIH seems to have done in the last year and a half running cover for Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, it is all the more startling to see this article published at all.

The article, published on the actual NIH website, pulls no punches. It also comes well documented.

Consider his opening abstract.

The ongoing “pandemic” involving the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus (SARS-CoV-2) has several characteristics that make it unique in the history of pandemics. This entails not only the draconian measures that some countries and individual states within the United States and initiated and made policy, most of which are without precedent or scientific support, but also the completely unscientific way the infection has been handled. For the 1st time in medical history, major experts in virology, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and vaccinology have not only been ignored, but are also demonized, marginalized and in some instances, become the victim of legal measures that can only be characterized as totalitarian. Discussions involving various scientific opinions have been eliminated, top scientists have been frightened into silence by threats to their careers, physicians have lost their licenses, and the concept of early treatment has been virtually eliminated. Hundreds of thousands of people have died needlessly as a result of, in my opinion and the opinion of others, poorly designed treatment protocols, mostly stemming from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, which have been rigidly enforced among all hospitals. The economic, psychological, and institutional damage caused by these unscientific policies is virtually unmeasurable. Whole generations of young people will suffer irreparable damage, both physical and psychological, possibly forever. The truth must be told.

From the article

He does make an interesting statement. “This pandemic, and the draconian response to it, never seem to go away, perhaps by design. However, because so much is at stake, people need to hear all the critical available data.” Now, that is something many of us have long suspected. But it is interesting to see this in an article on the NIH website.

Are they running cover for the upcoming disaster?

Pardon me for being skeptical. But I have to wonder that they were ever as far out of touch with reality as their articles seemed to indicate with regard to their attacks on the safety of ivermectin and the efficacy of the trial vaccines. In another article I wrote about the incredible incompetence of the head of the NIH, I captured an interview between Franklin Graham and the president of the NIH regarding vaccine hesitancy. In that article, I questioned how this NIH chairman could possibly be so out of touch with the reasons for vaccine hesitancy when it comes to these mRNA vaccines.

Let me post the interview here, again, in case you’re curious.

More highlights from Dr. Blaylock’s article

Dr. Blaylock continues. Excerpts for highlights. The link to the entire article is posted below.

I have never seen such an enormous effort by government, medical bureaucracies, media, private institutions, and even medical institutions to prevent dissenting views from being openly discussed — even the opinions of highly qualified scientists in every field of medicine from epidemiology, infectious disease, virology, pathology, and protective equipment engineering. This includes removal of dissenting physician’s licenses, loss of hospital privileges and retraction of peer-reviewed, published articles from the medical literature.[34,36] Science, as any true scientist should know, can only advance by an open discussion of all points of view — especially dissenting viewpoints. Science advances by challenging hypotheses and prevailing theories. Institutionalized views stifle scientific advancement and will, especially in clinical medicine, ultimately harm people. These rigid viewpoints become ideological in that any dissent from the particulars of the orthodoxy constitutes a cause for a vicious attack and shunning.[17]

At the core of all medical practice is the concept of informed consent. No prescription, procedure, surgery, or vaccine is to be given or performed without advising the patient, as regards the possible risks and benefits. According to the principle of informed consent, a patient – or in this case, the public at large — must be informed of the indications for the treatment, the efficacy of the treatment, possible available alternatives to the proposed treatment, and most importantly, all the potential side effects and complications, whether acute or long term. This is especially so for new and relatively untested procedures. For example, it has been estimated that for a new type of vaccine or especially genetic treatment, a minimum of 10 years of testing are required.

From the article


The most common cause for medical malpractice lawsuits is a doctor or institution not providing informed consent before initiating treatment. Not only are we now being denied informed consent, but also a war has been launched by powerful people and institutions, even governments, to prevent vital information from being disseminated.[29]

Unfortunately, the major institutions are purposefully hiding essential data and altering the data available within official circles to convince the public that there is only one solution to this so-called pandemic: Vaccination with virtually untested biological agents.

The blackout of essential information has become so intense that highly respected virologists, infectious disease specialists, and even the person who developed the technology of messenger RNA (mRNA) “vaccines,” have been banned from social media, the news media, and other sources of contact with the public at large.

The effort by vaccine promoters has become so intense that reputations are being ruined, careers destroyed, and even death threats received – as happened to the former head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Dr. Robert Redfield.

No dissenting voice is allowed, no matter how well-qualified, and supported by hard scientific data. One thing that keeps the pubic in the dark is that most people have virtually no understanding of the complex subjects of immunology….. To people untrained in these areas, it all seems quite simple: There’s a disease outbreak, you make a vaccine against the disease, people become immune, and all is well.

Unfortunately, because of the incredible complexity of the immune system, it does not always work like that. In fact, we are now learning that vaccines, under certain conditions, can make things much worse for the vaccinated.[65,91,94] However, these COVID shots are not actually vaccines — they are genetic biological agents that to this day remain largely untested. (They were tested for only 2 months before given Emergency Use Authorization [EUA] approval for public use.) That means if you take them, you become the guinea pig.

Some will respond that Pfizer did test its vaccine before being released. According to their information, over 11,000 people were given the vaccine and carefully followed. Afterward they announced the vaccine as 95% effective and quite safe. Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) interviewed several women who participated in the so-called pre-release study.[76] They each in turn had similar stories — Pfizer would not return most of their calls when they experienced serious side effects. They also stated that they signed an agreement that stated should they experience complications Pfizer would assume all cost of their medical care. Several of the ladies stated that Pfizer did not pay a cent of their medical expenses, which ran into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Despite the recommendation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that these companies should test the vaccine for at least 2 years, this suggestion was ignored by Pfizer and Moderna.

From the article


As noted, these new products are not in the strict sense traditional “vaccines,” which use either a part of a whole virus or bacteria combined with very powerful immune stimulant compounds called immune adjuvants.

The mRNA vaccines, first developed in the 1980s by Dr. Robert Malone, utilizes a complex technique that employs an artificially constructed mRNA molecule. The idea is that the RNA produces the desired antigen. In this case, it produces the spike protein of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus that causes COVID-19 infection. Ironically, that is the very part of the virus that causes damage in people, in particular acting as a neurotoxic molecule.[39] However, injecting mRNA by itself won’t work because the body contains an enzyme that would quickly destroy it.

To prevent this, Dr. Malone created a nanolipid carrier that is basically like a nanosized sac that contains the mRNA (resembles an artificial exosome).[50] This special carrier sac is incredibly small — about the size of the virus.[63]

We’ve been told that the carrier sac (the nanolipid carrier) is destroyed within a few days, thus preventing the body from continuously producing the deadly spike protein. . However, the truth is that the makers of these biological agents added polyethylene glycol to protect the nanolipid carrier so it would last much longer in the body — thus allowing the mRNA to produce far more spike protein for a much longer period. In fact, we don’t know how long the nanolipid/mRNA package lasts. The generated spike proteins may last months, years, or even a lifetime.

To summarize: The “vaccines” consist of artificially synthesized mRNA encapsulated within a protective sac (nanolipid carrier). The mRNA within the sac produces and releases an increasing amount of the destructive spike protein into your body — anywhere the nanolipid carrier is deposited. This is the critical part of the story. We were told that this sac of mRNA remains at the injection site in the person’s arm, continuously producing the spike protein. Theoretically, your body then can make antibodies against the spike protein, supposedly protecting you from COVID-19 infection.

Dr. Malone and others discovered that Pfizer had secretly conducted a biodistribution study, to see where the nanolipid carrier went after being injected into the limb of the recipient of the vaccine. A Freedom of Information lawsuit was used to obtain a copy of this study performed secretly by Pfizer. The results were quite revealing and very frightening.

They discovered that rather than remaining at the site of the injection (usually the arm-deltoid region), these mRNA-containing nanolipid carriers rapidly entered the bloodstream and were distributed all over the body, including the brain.[49]

The highest concentration of the injected nanolipid carriers was found in the ovaries of women.[75] The second highest concentration was within the bone marrow. High concentrations were also seen in the liver, lymph nodes, and spleen. In fact, the studies that demonstrated the nanolipid carriers were distributed among a number of tissues and organs, including lungs, heart, muscles, spinal cord, brain and kidneys.

From the article


This distribution could explain some of the devastating complications being reported involving several organ systems in people who have received the COVID vaccines. For example, infiltration of the heart explains the rising number of cases of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) being reported. More than 2,700 cases of vaccine-induced heart inflammation (myocarditis and pericarditis) have occurred among all age groups.[68] Among ages 12– 17 years, there have been 520 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis. These young people face progressive heart failure, arrhythmias, and other cardiac problems later in their lives. During this same period, there were 16,310 deaths reported, an increase of 373 over the previous week. These numbers are far higher than are seen with the viral infection itself or associated with other vaccines.

Because the spike protein-producing nanolipid carriers are lodged within organs and tissues, the immune system is unable to respond efficiently to prevent damage and may be responsible for much of the damage as a bystander injury effect. For the vaccines using two injections, the priming effect of the first dose would almost assure a magnification of the damage, possibly by immunoexcitotoxicity.[15,16]

With some of these nanolipid carriers now lodged within the cells, any attempt by the immune system to neutralize them will cause considerable damage not only to those cells, but to a wide zone of cells around them. This is referred to as “bystander damage.”

Essentially, once people are vaccinated, they will have the spike protein being produced everywhere in their bodies. Moreover again, recent studies confirm that it is the spike protein that causes COVID damage. That is, it’s toxic.

By this time, most, if not all the viruses, are no longer viable.[40,86,98] However, the dead viruses remain within the tissues, mainly in the lungs, where they stimulate the immune system to overreact — a mechanism, as stated, we refer to as a cytokine storm. Dead viruses can stimulate the immune system just as well as live viruses.

Studies of patients at this cytokine storm stage have shown that their breath contains no live viruses. Thus, wearing a mask is useless, and it impairs the patient’s ability to get sufficient oxygen. Ironically, putting these patients on a ventilator (respirator) dramatically increases the death rate. It’s thought that by using positive pressure to force the lung to work, the ventilator further damages the already severely damaged lungs.

The greatest success in saving such patients occurs when strong anti-inflammatory medications — such as high-dose corticosteroids, intravenous vitamin C, and Ivermectin are used.[45] In fact, in 27 studies conducted all over the world, Ivermectin drastically cut the death rate from COVID-19, even in the most severe and advanced cases.[4]

From the article


The difference between getting infected with the virus and exposure to the vaccine is that in the former case only people with age-related frailty, several chronic illnesses, immune deficiencies, and people with other immune-suppressing disorders are at any substantial risk from COVID-19. That is no more than 5% of the population.

Severe disease or death in a healthy person below age 40 is extremely rare, occurring <0.01% of the time. But unlike natural infection, the vaccine — while still dangerous to those who are immune-suppressed — also does serious damage to young people, even if they’re healthy. The majority of deaths associated with the vaccines are among the aged population, with the average age being 73.1 years.

As noted, we’ve seen a dramatic rise in cases of myocarditis in the vaccinated young, along with other serious injuries and deaths. This is happening because the nanolipid carrier of the mRNA travels directly to the heart, triggering intense inflammation in their heart muscle.[59] As also noted, this process could result in the production of the spike proteins for months, years, or even for a lifetime. The nanolipid carrier has been shown to enter the brain, liver, spleen, lymph nodes, and kidneys. Another reaction to these vaccines is what’s called antibody dependent enhancement (ADE), a common reaction observed with other types of vaccines.[46,92] With ADE, exposure to the wild-type virus in the vaccinated person can trigger a much more pathological damaging effect than in the unvaccinated person.

Because the COVID vaccines trigger a dramatic increase in antibody production, ADE becomes much more likely. Not only does this result in an increase in severity of symptoms if a vaccinated person is exposed to the natural virus in the future, but the virus also reproduces faster and becomes more pathogenic, meaning the severity of a vaccinated person’s illness is worse.

The H1N1 flu vaccine increased the risk of death for those who were vaccinated when they were exposed to the flu virus.[6] We see the same phenomenon with these COVID “vaccines,” and many other types of vaccines. It may be that some of the hospitalizations and deaths now being seen are not due to a so-called “Delta variant,” but rather are caused by the vaccines themselves.[55,89,90]

Go to:


The majority of the testing for COVID infection has been performed using what is called a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test in which a person’s nose or sometimes throat is swabbed for evidence of viral genetic material. The inventor of this test stated that no clinical infection can be diagnosed using the PCR test alone. Yet the CDC used this test to imply that tens of millions of Americans were infected with COVID-19.

We have now learned that the test does not identify the whole virus, just a segment. In addition, many other viruses, bacteria, and even some things that are not microorganisms at all can yield a positive test. For instance, the president of Tanzania secretly had a sheep, a goat, and a pawpaw (a type of fruit) tested using PCR by his health department.[60] The goat and the pawpaw both tested positive.

Recently, the CDC announced that the PCR test would no longer be used because they discovered that it cross-reacts with the influenza virus, meaning virtually all influenza infections in the last flu season could have been diagnosed as COVID-19. This explains why there were only a few hundred flu cases reported in the entire U.S. this past season — a number unprecedented in modern times. (The CDC claims that each year there are about 30,000 deaths from the flu and over 300,000 hospital admissions).

Cycles of the PCR test are run to amplify its sensitivity, and it is known that doing more than 30 cycles increases the likelihood of the test being falsely positive. Yet the CDC recommended that all labs perform 40 or more cycles, which would have meant that around 97% of positive tests were, in fact, negative. That is, the person tested most likely did not have a COVID infection.

Combined with the lack of specificity of the PCR test, fear mongering by the media and the CDC greatly exaggerated the impact of the first wave of the COVID outbreak. The same is almost certainly true with the new Delta variant. Virologists emphasize that the more people who are vaccinated, the more variants will appear.[20] However, while the variants are more contagious, they are less harmful. This is the nature of virus mutations.

From the article


In fact, based on the observation that the vaccinated have very high titers of virus in their nasopharynx, according to mRNA technology developer Dr. Robert Malone, it is the vaccinated who are more likely spreading the new variant, as they remain asymptomatic longer than an unvaccinated person.[47] Viral titers (concentrations) were found to be very high in the noses of vaccinated as well as infected unvaccinated people. If the “vaccine” worked, they should have found none or extremely small amounts of the virus.

The average age of death from COVID-19 is around 75 years (95% occurred over age 65 years). Moreover, the highest death rate among vaccinated people is in the same age group — the very ones the vaccines are supposed to protect.

The most egregious form of this fear mongering is to imply that the Delta variant infections are all in the unvaccinated. This is not true. A study in Scotland, for example, found that 87% of Delta variant cases occurred in the fully vaccinated.[27] Similar findings were reported in the United Kingdom and Israel. Moreover, a recent report released by the CDC found that 74% of the cases in a Cape Cod, Massachusetts cluster were among vaccinated individuals.[54] Most of these people were reported to have the Delta variant.

From the article


The vaccines for COVID-19 stand to make more money for their developers than any other vaccines at any time in history. Those same companies also wield enormous financial power and influence in the media, medical journals, medical societies (such as the American Medical Association), hospitals, research institutions, and government bureaucracies (such as the National Institutes of Health [NIH]). Moreover, of course, they donate vast sums to elected officials.

We are witnessing an unprecedented attack on free speech directed at anyone who challenges pro-vaccine propaganda, including virologists, infectious disease specialists, epidemiologists, and pulmonologists. Dr. Michael Yeadon, ex-chief science officer for Pfizer; a whistleblower from Moderna; Dr. Robert Malone, the developer of the mRNA vaccine technique; and other highly qualified scientists have been banned from social media and the mainstream news outlets for speaking out. Why? Because they might convince people that these vaccines are dangerous, and that they should be halted immediately.

From the article

You can read the article HERE for the full report.


As bad as all this is, what’s worse in the alignment of forces being used to prevent safe methods from being used to stop this virus. When it was revealed that early use of hydroxychloroquine could significantly reduce the severity of the disease and prevent the need for a ventilator, reports immediately surfaced from government agencies declaring that the drug was of no use, was dangerous, and should not be used. This occurred despite reports of hydroxychloroquine’s benefits from doctors actually treating patients. In some states, prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine were banned. We see the same thing with Ivermectin, another highly effective and safe medication.[45]

Every time a treatment was discovered that improved COVID patients’ outcomes or prevented transmission of the virus, forces stepped in to prevent the treatment from being used.

A growing number of natural treatments that could have prevented the spread of this virus, including most of the serious infections, have been blocked by these controllers. Incredibly, a law was passed that prevented clinical physicians from even suggesting such treatments. Curcumin, baicalin, apigenin, luteolin, EGCG, myoinositol, ashwagandha, magnesium, docosahexaenoic acid/ eicosapentaenoic acid, high dose IV vitamin C, Vitamin D3, melatonin, astragalus, beta-glucan, mushroom extracts, and ashwagandha all enhance a person’s immunity, thus preventing infection.[2,8,12,13,28,35,37,42,48,51,52,61,67,69,70,73,80,84,87,88,96,97]

Dr. Pierre Kory, a founder of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), made a number of discoveries that dramatically improved the survival of patients with serious COVID-19 cases. Unlike many of the vaccine-only proponents, Dr. Kory has spent his professional life treating some of the sickest in intensive care unit (ICU) settings, including hundreds of COVID patients. But each discovery he made was intensely resisted and rejected by the medical elite and bureaucracies, at least until the proof became so overwhelming that they could no longer deny it. In the interim, thousands died as a result of the elite controller’s intransigence. There is evidence that early treatment, before deterioration occurs, can reduce hospitalization by 85 percent.[53]

From the article


Dr. Kory also discovered that Ivermectin, a medicine used to treat parasitic infections, was perhaps one of the most powerful weapons we possess in the battle against COVID-19, reducing the death rate of even very sick patients to such a degree that it has been called a medical miracle.[9,21,41,44]

Dr. Kory and his colleagues — all highly respected and frequently quoted pulmonary and infectious disease experts — put together a protocol using this safe, inexpensive medicine and other compounds. (FLCCC Alliance. Their protocol has now been used around the world but not in the United States. Deaths and cases requiring hospitalization in countries that have used Ivermectin — including Mexico, India, Brazil, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Paraguay, Peru, Argentina, Zimbabwe, and major cities in other countries — have been dramatically and rapidly reduced. In addition, recovery times have been shortened, patient deterioration has been prevented when the drug was used early, and mortality has been reduced among severely ill ICU patients.

In fact, when taken once a week, Ivermectin has been shown to dramatically prevent COVID infection, even in hospital workers who are around many sick patients.[12,14] Ivermectin has been studied and shown to be highly effective in 27 carefully controlled trials that included 6,612 patients; 16 trials were randomized, prospective, controlled trials of the highest quality. Yet, the medical establishment — the vaccine-only promoters — has rejected even considering this safe, inexpensive medication for treatment or prevention of COVID.

Worse, doctors, as well as the general public, are warned by medical associations, the FDA and the CDC not to use Ivermectin.[93] In some states, doctors can lose their license should they write a prescription for this lifesaving medication, one that has been used safely for the past 40 years all over the world as a treatment for parasitic infections.[33,58] Besides being a powerful anti-inflammatory and suppressing viral replication Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit a major form of excitotoxicity seen in the face of chronic inflammation and microglial activation.[3]

From the article


It seems to me, and others, that the pharmaceutical companies making these vaccines don’t want a rival treatment that would cut into their profits. In my opinion, these experimental vaccines are being distributed to the public under a false pretense. According to the EUA act, an experimental treatment cannot be used except in a proven national emergency (pandemic), and only if there are no other available treatments for the condition. Keep in mind that the FDA did not approve the drug presently being used by Pfizer — it is still under EUA regulations as an experimental “vaccine.”

COVID-19 never satisfied the criteria for a pandemic, which requires that the infection must affect a large number of people around the world and have a high mortality rate. This pandemic definition has been used for decades — until this outbreak. The World Health Organization changed the criteria for this “pandemic,” dropping the need for a high death rate.

For the majority of people, the death rate from COVID-19 is lower than that of a mild to moderate flu season. For those under age 40, the death rate is 0.01%; 99.99% of those infected will fully recover. For all ages, the death rate is 0.26%; 99.74% will recover. Those numbers do not justify mandatory vaccination.

On the other hand, eight clinical trials have shown a significant reduction in transmission of COVID-19, even among healthcare workers, with the use of Ivermectin. (FLCCC data).[32] Three of those studies were randomized clinical trials — research of the highest order. Based on these studies, the emergency authorization should be revoked, and vaccination should be stopped before more people are hurt.

From the article


There are a number of other natural treatments and preventatives that could be used by anyone wanting to protect themselves from COVID. The basis for all of these treatments is reducing inflammation, and several natural compounds also restore immune balance. Others are beneficial because they reduce immunoexcitotoxicity, a possible mechanism for cytokine storms.

These compounds include:

  • Nano-curcumin
  • Nano-quercetin
  • N-acetyl-L-cysteine
  • Intravenous Vitamin C (high dose)
  • Melatonin
  • B-complex vitamins
  • Hesperidin
  • Pterostilbene
  • Apigenin
  • Magnesium
  • Taurine
  • Baicalin.

Immune stimulants should only be used during the first 8 days of a COVID infection to prevent aggravating hyperimmune symptoms. This 8-day period is the period when the virus is reproducing very rapidly in the lungs. After 8–11 days, all the viruses are dead, and then the danger is from a hyperimmune reaction to those dead viruses. At this stage the idea is to target inflammation and excitotoxicity, as live viruses are no longer the chief danger in most cases.

Recent studies have shown that a significant number of fully vaccinated people are contracting (supposedly) COVID-19 infections as in Israel, where virtually everyone has been vaccinated. In a carefully conducted study in Vietnam hospitals, it was shown that the vaccinated medical care workers were spreading high levels of viruses to fellow workers, patients, and visitors.[23] A majority of medical centers and hospitals in the United States have mandated vaccines for all employees, even those not in contact with patients. These studies suggest that the medical staff is now a major source of Covid-19 transmission and are acting as superspreaders.

More than 80% of the COVID-variant cases are in fully vaccinated people, and the latest reports indicate the vaccines are ineffective against variants — hence the call for renewed masking. (CDC report).[83] Ivermectin as a preventive measure has a success rate of around 80 to 85% against COVID-19. Some studies have reported no infections in hospital workers taking Ivermectin.

Fear remains the vaccine makers main weapon. The latest strategy is to convince the public that second and third waves of new variants will restore the dangers that have subsided since the original appearance of this virus. All these preventive measures should work against any and all variants. And natural immunity to the original virus appears to give a person full protection against the so-called Delta variant.

This type of cross-immunity occurred with the outbreak of the much deadlier SARS virus, 2002–2004, even with 30% viral mutation variance. The Delta variant differs from the original COVID virus genetically by a mere 1.3%.

Go to:


These vaccines were allowed to be used via the EUA even though only very short-term safety studies (2 months) had been conducted by the manufacturers. Several people who participated in these safety trials stated in a forum held by Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) that Pfizer representatives promised them that any medical expenses they incurred as a result of the vaccines would be taken care of by the company. According to this testimony — Pfizer did not follow through on that promise.

Several women suffered serious and apparently permanent damage from taking the test vaccines. Several of these participants, as stated earlier, confirmed that Pfizer representatives would not return their calls, and never paid a cent of their incurred medical expenses. The VAERS data indicates that between December 14, 2020 and October 1, 2021 there were 111,921 reports of serious injuries following the COVID-19 vaccinations, which adds credence to the claims of the pre-release study group as far as a high incidence of serious complications before these vaccines were release upon the public.[68]

The FDA recommended a 2-year intensive study of those who had been vaccinated. The pharmaceutical companies rejected that recommendation. Congressional inquiries have shown that essentially zero studies have been conducted on the millions of American citizens who have taken these vaccines. (As noted in a letter from Senator Johnson to Francis Collins, director of the NIH; Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC; and Janet Woodcock, acting commissioner of the FDA on July 13, 2021).

So far, we’ve only seen the short-term side effects of these vaccines, which are terrifying enough. However, long-term effects can occur years or even decades following vaccination.

From the article


Because the biodistribution study (noted above) demonstrates that the highest concentration of the mRNA-containing nanolipid carrier per gram of tissue in women occurred in the ovaries, meaning every vaccinated woman of reproductive age must now worry about possible infertility or a higher risk of ovarian cancer. (The nanolipid mRNA induces chronic inflammation, the principal cause of most cancers). Data from a corrected preliminary study of vaccinated pregnant women reported in the New England Journal of Medicine demonstrated that pregnant women vaccinated during the first trimester of their pregnancy (20 weeks), had an 82% chance of losing their baby.[78] Yet the American Academy of Obstetrics and Gynecology announced, as did the CDC, that these vaccines were safe to take during pregnancy. It is known that immune stimulation during the third trimester dramatically increases the risk of the child becoming autistic or developing schizophrenia later in life.[56,64] An extensive literature demonstrates the danger of immune stimulation during pregnancy.[10,11,18,19,62]

We will not know if women vaccinated during their third trimester will have children with a higher risk of becoming autistic for at least 6 years, the usual time span for symptom appearance. Moreover, we will not know if a similarly vaccinated woman will have a schizophrenic child until that child reaches adolescence, which is the usual time of first symptom appearance for that condition.[43] As far as I know, no women or their husbands were warned of this real danger to their children.

No one knows what may happen in the future to these children. By their own admission the vaccine manufacturers conducted no studies with pregnant women prior to the release of these vaccines.

Go to:


Dr. Blaylock Continues:

I have written several articles in peer-reviewed medical journals on the effects of excessive vaccination on brain development.[16,18] As noted, immune stimulation during pregnancy can alter how the child’s brain develops. We know that the adult brain is also at risk following excessive immune stimulation.[66,70] One obvious risk is the induction of autoimmune diseases such as lupus, autoimmune encephalomyelitis, and multiple sclerosis. Neurodegenerative disease are also a real possibility based on careful research linking peripheral inflammation and central nervous system microglial/macrophage priming and activation.[25,57,74] There is some evidence that the spike protein may be able to trigger several neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and most frightening Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.[95] Recently, neurologists have classified at least two cases of neurological disorders in women post COVID-19 vaccination, which they classified as “functional” neurological disorders, suggesting a psychiatric causation. While this could be true in some cases, we must keep in mind that the medical establishment also classified fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, and autism spectrum disorders all as “functional” until real neurological explanations were forth coming. In a recent review Stephanie Seneff and Greg Nigh reviewed a number of possible unintended consequences associated with the mRNA vaccines with strong scientific reasoning.[77] There is also evidence that the mRNA being released can enter the cell nucleus thus altering the DNA of the cell.[81] This would open the possibility of a vertical transfer to offspring.


Studies by Dr. James Lyons-Weiler and others have confirmed that components of the COVID vaccines cross-react with more than 11 human tissues, meaning autoimmune diseases can develop involving one or all those tissues.


New studies have demonstrated a very frightening possibility. We are all being told that the virus enters cells using principally the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor. But in truth, there is another mechanism: exosomes.[30,38,85] Exosomes are much like the nanolipid carrier used in the vaccines. They are microscopic sacs that contain various components — such as RNA and DNA fragments — that can leave the cell, travel to other cells, enter them, and pass along genetic information. Exosomes are a cell-communication mechanism.

Unfortunately, many viruses can hijack these exosomes, insert their genetic information, and then exit the infected cells and travel to surrounding cells or even distant cells and enter them, thus spreading the infection. Infections by viruses cause the infected cell to produce a tremendous number of exosomes — all containing the viruses’ genetic information. The scary part is that the mRNA “vaccines” are essentially artificial exosomes, each carrying the very part of the virus (the spike protein) that does harm to the body. We have, in essence, traded a natural infection for an artificial one that could be far worse.


A recent study demonstrated just how dangerous it is when infected exosomes enter the brain.[57] These exosomes entered microglia, the brain’s special immune cells and the main source of excitotoxins. The exosomes caused the microglia to start generating very high levels of inflammatory cytokines and other immune mediators. These inflammatory substances are then released and do considerable harm to surrounding brain structures. This all occurs with the first injection.

We say that these microglia are “primed,” meaning they are in a state of hyperreactivity, but have not fully released their destructive cytokines and excitotoxins yet. The second injection of the mRNA COVID vaccine activates this primed microglia, putting them into an extremely destructive state in which they release high concentrations of inflammatory cytokines and excitotoxins. This explains why people have worse reactions to the second vaccine dose.

The fear is that these vaccines could very well trigger neurodegeneration within specific brain areas, each causing a particular neurological disorder such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, or even a totally new neurological disorder never seen before.[22]

These vaccines can also trigger seizures, strokes, and even neuropsychiatric disorders. Keep in mind that in some cases these disorders do not appear for years or even decades. Dr. Peter McCullough, a professor of internal medicine and cardiology, cited a case in which a woman lost all memory after receiving the first vaccine dose.[26] He also told of a fully vaccinated woman who lost her baby after breastfeeding. The child died of a thrombotic/hemorrhagic episode.

It has been shown that the nanolipid carrier does pass into the mother’s breast milk and can be transmitted through the placenta.[1,79,82] Studies have now shown that the COVID-19 spike protein can induce Parkinson’s disease in humans.[26] The vaccine, in essence, releases massive doses of the spike protein within the body, including in the brain and spinal cord. Importantly, the release, because of the widespread distribution of the nanolipid carriers, is directly within each involved tissue, thus maximizing the damage. This is a disaster in the making. [4,7] In my opinion, these vaccines should be stopped now before many more are seriously hurt or even killed.[71,72]

So back to my thoughts about this stuff

Cogny Mann here. I can’t help but wonder if the NIH is trying to distance itself from an impending disaster by allowing this article to be published. The Pfizer documents are being released, with damning evidence against their knowledge of these issues and their attempts to cover it up.

The Epoch Times recently published an article documenting how many people were paid off to “promote” the vaccines and “bury the evidence.” At this point, the best the NIH might be able to do to save face is to eat its own to try to maintain some semblance of credibility.

I don’t know. I’m just thinking out loud.

The orignal article is referenced on the NIH web page Covid-19 pandemic: What is the truth? – PMC (

Orignal article cited: Blaylock RL. Covid-19 pandemic: What is the truth? Surg Neurol Int 2021;12:591.

Read More
Covid-19, Current Events

Covid Internment Camps In Canada

It is stunning. Back in the summer of 2020, the Trudeau government put out bids for internment camps for Canadians, to be located in every province and territory in Canada. Many people questioned the process and what the bids were for.

The Globe and Mail defended him, saying there was nothing to it and no one was going to force detainment of Canadians against their will.

In fact, there was a report about 5 months ago on CBC where Randy Hillier, a member of provincial parliament was questioning the use of these camps, asking if they were going to be used to forcibly detain Canadians against their will. The prime minister himself said there was nothing to it and we should be careful about what news sources we trust. Check it out.

Is anyone surprised the man cannot seem to be trusted?

Here we are, 5 months later. Listen to this summary by Tucker Carlson on the current situation in Canada. Think this can't happen in a free country? A country with a charter of rights and freedoms that seems to prevent this kind of thing?

Think again.

As of last October, all of the mainstream media was knocking Randy Hillier, saying there are NO internment camps in Canada, and that it was all "overblown" and "causing hysteria."

MSN news on the covid camps:

There is no evidence that the Canadian federal government is using Covid-19 as a cover to construct “internment camps” and forcibly round up citizens. But the theory—sprung from a mix of QAnon-style tea leaf reading and pseudo gotcha journalism—has taken root in the inboxes of Canada and throughout the conspiracy clear web.

Again, from last October, in the good old reliable Huffington Post:

Federal COVID-19 internment camps are not a thing in Canada, and any messaging suggesting such is a dangerous conspiracy theory.

That’s the message federal officials are sending to Canadians in the wake of circulating misinformation suggesting that the government will force Canadians into “COVID-19 internment camps.”

There’s no truth to that, says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“There is a tremendous amount of noise and harmful misinformation … on the internet,” he told reporters Tuesday. “We need to hold together and resist people who would sow chaos within our communities and our democracy.”

So what is happening, according to the Huff, according to their reports last October?

The federal government is funding voluntary self-isolation sites for people unable to quarantine any other way. These include travel-related quarantine sites and a recently announced Toronto facility to house homeless people with COVID-19 and other vulnerable populations.

“As we work together to keep COVID-19 under control, this new site will help those for whom it’s simply not possible to limit close contacts and self-isolate effectively at home,” Health Minister Patty Hajdu said at the announcement in September.

Well, yeah. But that was last October.

So what is happening now? What is REALLY happening now?

Listen to Tucker Carlson regarding the deal now, 5 months later, if you travel outside of Canada, and return, even as a Canadian citizen.

Trudeau has created chaos at his own borders. Not for travellers entering with tuberculosis or anything. Just for Covid.

Take the plight of a Windsor, Ontario couple that has a long history of crossing the border, but with recent rule changes, has a nightmare on their hands. As reported in the Windsor Star,

Throughout the year-long pandemic, Fareeha Nadeem said she and her husband Nadeem Javed have been able to cross the border — Fareeha, regularly, as a mental health professional categorized as an essential worker and Nadeem, periodically, for treatment for his hypertension medical condition.

The night before the pair’s most recent trip together to Michigan on Feb. 16, she said they reached out to the Canadian Border Services Agency, by phone and on its website, and were assured they were good to go — and to return. Whenever her husband crossed the border, Fareeha said he’d spend the following 14 days at home in quarantine.

Fareeha Nadeem and her husband were exasperated by inconsistent treatment at the Canadian border due to ever-changing Covid requirements.

But on the return home that day, Nadeem was allegedly told to return to Michigan and obtain a COVID-19 test. He went back to a Dearborn urgent care facility, obtained a rapid antigen test, returned again to the border with a negative test result but then was told it was “not acceptable.” He was directed to drive to one of the nearest Canadian COVID-19 quarantine hotels in Mississauga. There was an Environment Canada snowfall warning in effect at the time for the region.

Hours into the ordeal, Nadeem’s hypertension flared up and an ambulance had to be called to the border to rush him to Windsor Regional Hospital. Treated there, he was told again he had to quarantine in Toronto, and an ambulance dispatched him there (he was prohibited from stopping at home to retrieve his medication or a change of clothing).

On his third day of being confined to his hotel room — his meals delivered with a knock on the door, and his only visitors the nurses who tested him in full PPE gear — Nadeem was given the green light to go home by any means he wished, including train. His wife said he rented a vehicle for the drive home.

Both educated professionals, Fareeha said the couple was nevertheless too “shy, scared, embarrassed” to raise much fuss at the time over their treatment, which she now describes as “dehumanizing” and a human rights issue. “Something like this has never happened in our lives before — I was scared.”

The funny (or sad) part about this is these quarantine centres are touted as "voluntary."

But it's not voluntary. If you travel outside of Canada, you must (supposedly) provide them information on your plan to self-isolate.

Check out the link to the Canadian government website here.

But for the highlight reel (and this is directly from the page above on the government website):

Federal quarantine applies for travellers entering Canada. If you can enter Canada and you have no symptoms, you must quarantine for a minimum of 14 days.

At this time, you are not excluded from quarantine, even if you have:

  • been vaccinated for COVID-19
  • tested negative for COVID-19
  • recovered from COVID-19

Flying into Canada – your quarantine period includes a mandatory 3 night pre-paid booking at a government-authorized hotel at your own cost.


As a traveller, you must demonstrate that you have a suitable plan for quarantine.

  • You’re expected to make these plans, within your own means, before travelling to Canada. 
  • Foreign nationals who do not have a suitable plan may be denied entry into Canada.
  • Those who arrive in Canada without a suitable place to quarantine will be directed to a federal designated quarantine facility for the full 14 day quarantine period.

So it looks like either you pay your own freight at a "government approved hotel" for three days on your dime, or you "will be directed to a federal designated facility" for the full 14 days.

And YOU are now ending up paying the bill.

See how that works? It started out by the media saying nothing to it. Now the media is faithfully reporting that these people should have known better. All without ever admitting that the questions asked 6 months ago were actually not only legitimate, but turned out to be true.

Read More

Are The Coronavirus Fears Justified By The Numbers?

Is the Coronavirus the apocalypse or a big nothing burger?

 Are the Coronavirus fears that are being propagated in the mainstream media justified by the numbers coming back from the test results? Depending on how you read the results, (or, more likely, depending on who you listen that is interpreting them, since most people never really look at the actual data) the world has either entered into the twilight zone or... the twilight zone.

It's just two different kinds of twilight zone, driven by two different agendas.

What do the test numbers really tell us?

Well, for one thing, depending on how you read the numbers, you may well have already had the virus. There was a recent study done in Santa Clara County, California, where they did testing of a portion of the population - 3000 people - a small portion, but on people other than just those presenting with symptoms and they found that

... the results suggested that between 2.5% and 4.2% of people in the county have contracted COVID-19, which is 50 to 85 times greater than the number of cases being reported at the time.

That is a stunning discrepancy between anticipated and actual cases. Now, keep in mind that the left-side-twilight zone people will find all kinds of problems with jumping to any conclusion that this ripples through to be a valid statistic of the population at large. They are quick to say the test that the researchers used was not reliable and that the sample size is so small as to be meaningless.

Or else, alternatively, by God, those numbers must mean this thing is a LOT more to be feared than we thought!!!!!!

But whose agendas are driving this thing, anyway?

The panic or the negative reaction to it as overblown tripe seems to run through the minds of the masses pretty much in lockstep to their political predispositions. At least, that seems to be the way it is running in North America.

It seems those on the political left see the Covid-19 pandemic as having brought us into a twilight zone of a super-bug that is capable of wiping out our entire generation if we don't hose down everything (and everyone around us) with hand sanitizer and sleep in isolation rooms with N95 masks.

Those on the political right see something equally worthy of the twilight zone label; but it is something more sinister than a virus. What the right sees is a good crisis being milked by power-hungry politicians hell-bent on maintaining power and removing Trump from office.

Does the truth of where this thing washes out lie somewhere in the middle? Or is it being measured on a somewhat more simple line of left vs right than it deserves? Are we being nearly nuanced enough in how we look at this?

The numbers tell us that you can't look at ANY ONE particular city or state and try to anticipate what it means for the country.

New York City is a highly mobile, international city with lots of traffic and a varied population that comes and goes to and fro for every kind of reason. Right now (as of 2020-04-19) the official numbers of cases run around 10,000. For a city of 8.8 million people, the rough math says about 1 in every 880 people in NYC has or did have the virus.

Washington, D.C. has a similar type of population: an international city with lots of traffic and a varied population that comes and goes to and fro for every kind of reason. According to the Washington Post, there are currently 3100 cases  (as of 2020-04-21). The population of DC is about 702,000. That makes a rough calculation of about 1 in every 225 people in DC has or did have the virus.

Unfortunately, I can't trust that the numbers aren't jacked up anyway.

Again, looking at the data from the study done in Santa Clara County, California, we see some real discrepancy between what they expected and what the testing results show for the number of cases.

A total of 50 tests came back positive. After adjusting for differences in zip code, race and sex between the sample population and Santa Clara as a whole, the researchers estimated that between 48,000 and 81,000 people in the 2-million-strong county had contracted coronavirus at some point. At the time, the health department was reporting about 1,000 positive cases.

They were estimating Santa Clara county to have had about 1,000 positive cases, with a population of 2,000,000 giving the expected rate of 1 out of every 2000 people for Santa Clara County. But based on the actual results from the test, it looks like an actual rate of 1 in every 25 to 40 people.

So, until they have test results based on testing more than the people who are already symptomatic, we have no idea what we're really up against.

And you see this idea being talked about by both sides for different purposes.

People on the right, such as Rush Limbaugh, seem to believe that this thing blows through the population for the most part without even being an issue for any concern. On his radio show, he said,

The common cold is normally a mild illness that resolves without treatment in a few days. And because of its mild nature, most cases are self-diagnosed. However, infection with rhinovirus or one of the other viruses responsible for common cold symptoms can be serious in some people. Complications from a cold can cause serious illnesses and, yes, even death – particularly in people who have a weak immune system.

He then went on to say that statistically - statistically - this coronavirus is potentially even less dangerous than a common flu bug for the number of deaths and hospitalizations compared to the normal flu bug every year.

Although Rush is excoriated and lambasted relentlessly by his critics, his thought is, basically, this thing is overblown; not enough to bring the economy to a screeching halt.

And people on the left? Well, they're people on the left. For them, it all depends who is saying it.

And they think Rush is an idiot. So if Rush says it, it's asinine.

But if other people say it - especially someone from the democratic side of the isle - then it's "thoughtful" and "weighed carefully against the science."

Check out this little speech by Dr. Birx on the idea of opening the beaches in Florida and why it's maybe not a reason for global panic:

See? Thoughtful. Nuanced.

And yet, when Limbaugh makes statements like it's not the end of the world if states make determinations to open their economies, he's stupid.

And if the president does it? Well, he's just an idiot, apparently.

Apparently, if the president says it, it must be stupid just because HE is saying it.

You want to hear stupid? I was listening to a conservative talk show last weekend (don't remember which) but a caller basically said as much. He asked why hydroxichloriquine was even on the table for discussion for a possible treatment for Covid-19. The host asked if patients want to try it and their doctors think it's a good idea, then why should they not be allowed to try it? Why can't we trust the medical professionals to make medical decisions?

The response from this guy? Well, he said there was no way in hell he was going to try hydroxicholoriquine if he got sick because it has to be stupid because Trump is recommending it and Trump is an idiot.

It's what he honestly said. I lie not.

There IS an increasing number of reports that seem to recognize this thing may be less deadly than the first numbers suggested.

A Los Angeles news station reports it may be more widespread than first thought.

An estimated 320,000 adults in Los Angeles County may have been infected with coronavirus, according to preliminary results of a study that suggests the illness is far more widespread than current testing shows and the death rate is much lower.

But depending on who is reporting, it is either seen as a cause not to see this thing as a deadly sweep, or a cause for fear that the sky is falling. It always amazes me how different people can even look at the same numbers and come to such drastically different conclusions.

But are some manipulating the figures for nefarious gain?

The short answer that I hold to is that I was suspending judgement at first on this thing as to how cautious we needed to be with it and how dangerous it was. But however it might have needed to be given benefit of the doubt in the beginning, it is becoming clear that the powers that be have been trying to co-opt this thing as a tool to take out Trump.

Nancy Pelosi makes Trump out to be a racist for blocking flights in January from China and then, in March, says he's not done enough to help the country but seems to block pretty much every move he tries to make to keep the country going as a political stunt to make him look bad.

But it gets worse.

What is troubling is the number of reports that medical officials are told to report deaths unrelated to te virus as caused by the virus anyway. Consider this report from NPR radio:

But new guidelines from the National Center for Health Statistics, which Minnesota follows, will err on the side of pinning more deaths on COVID-19, at least provisionally.

An alert issued Thursday instructs those who fill out death certificates to categorize pneumonia deaths that can’t be traced to another underlying condition as presumptively COVID-19.

What could POSSIBLY be the reason for that? Yeah. I don't know, either. But think of how much fuel that adds to the fires of conspiracy. It sure feels like an inappropriate use of the numbers.

One analyst looked at some of the stuff in this CDC guideline given to doctors and medical staff on how and when to report as a Covid-19 death vs a non-Covid-19 death. According to the CDC guideline, the result is....

“The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID- 19 being the underlying cause more often than not,” the guidelines read.

“COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death,” CDC guidelines issued March 24 read. “Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc.,” the guidance continued.

“If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II.”

I don't know about you. But I find that troubling. They are coming right out and saying that they are expecting the coding to show the cause of death as coronavirus more often than not. Also, it says they SHOULD report it as Covid-19 where the disease "caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death." But if they had underlying conditions, they CAN BE reported in part 2."

So..... how often does the "can be" part get done as compared to the "should be" done part? And how does this shake out in real life?

Remember the telephone game you played in kindergarten?

The reality is that it seems this "over-attributing to Covid-19" happening in ridiculous situations.

There are numerous reports of false attributions to Covid-19 when it seems pretty obvious that it is overreach. In fact, many in the medical community say the same thing. Fox News interviewed Dr. Scott Jensen from Minnesota who feels the reporting is ridiculous and could be very misleading.

Why Coronavirus death reports are inflated

The problem for many is that Dr Jensen is a Republican State Senator. So for the left, he is part of the "Fox News Conspiracy."

But you have to think about what his complaint is. He says that in his 35 years of medicine, it's hard to imagine that for the amount of money a hospital admission gets for a patient ($13,000) and the amount of money they get for putting a patient on a ventilator ($39,000) it's not affecting the healthcare decisions that are being made.

And when you hear a number of doctors saying these patients sometimes shouldn't be put on ventilators but should just be put on oxygen, that is a concern. According to some doctors, some of these patients might well get lung damage from the respirator.

Now, maybe this is where some of the "nuance" maybe needs doing. In a March 25th article in Buzzfeed, there was a report of patients being underreported as having Covid-19 due to lack of testingPerhaps - perhaps - this is why the CDC changed their guidelines. 

It is wise to give benefit of the doubt. I try. I really do. I'm just trying to be a cognitive man. And I don't always have enough hours in a day to compare timelines of stories to see what might have let to what.

But by any measure, by the time the kindergarteners in the media finish the game, it's usually a chicken little disaster.

The CLASSIC case of "reporting" frenzy is a story that came out of a Louisiana newspaper where there was "a one-day old baby who died of Covid-19."

Now, we all (should) know that a one-day old baby can't contract a disease that takes two weeks to manifest after exposure. And the reality of the story was that the pregnant mother went into premature labour (at about 20 weeks or so?) and the baby died a day after it's premature death. Apparently,

The coroner said the child has not tested positive for Covid-19 but doctors and the state's epidemiologist agreed that the death can be ruled a coronavirus-related death.

How does that help anything but the hysteria and the conspiracy theories?

And just because you have a conspiracy theory, it doesn't mean it's not true. Sometimes, they're harder than hell to prove to people who choose not to see it - you know - "court of law" level proof. But there are a lot of people who get away with murder.

Part of what goads these people on the left is the popularity of a President that has them in his crosshairs.

He is stopping them from simply doing what they want, which is to play class warfare to maintain their seats of power by sowing hatred and discontent.

And right now, quite frankly, it feels like they're trying to milk this one for all it's worth to try to maintain power and control.

While congress should have been dealing with funding for medical preparation measures back in February, they were too busy impeaching the president. And now, they oppose him at every turn, all the while saying he isn't doing enough.

They are mad with rage. Back in January, Nancy Pelosi was criticizing Trump for shutting down the flights from China. It was racist, she said. Then, in March, she criticized him for not doing enough.

For the left, consistency seems to be the hobgoblin of small minds unless the consistency is a hatred for Trump.

The fear on the right seems to be that the democratic side is holding on to keeping things locked down until there is a vaccine.

And now, even now, there is already a hysteria being ginned up about a possible second coronavirus wave next winter even worse than the first. THAT seems to be good justification for keeping the alarm bells ringing until there is a vaccine.

Never waste a good crisis.

This seems unnecessary.

The numbers seem to be going down. There are numerous treatments being done by many doctors using existing medications and with stellar results. The economy is reeling from the unwillingness to acknowledge that countries that are simply refusing to go overboard with these draconian measures of quarantining are seeing virus infection numbers no worse or maybe even better than all these countries sheltering in place.

So what do you do?

You can pray. Real prayer changes things. I truly believe these people are evil and with nefarious intent. This has to be treated as spiritual warfare.

And you can write. Write to your congressmen, your senators. Write letters to the editors of your papers. Call your local talk shows. And be prepared for pushback. The left can be a very, very disingenuous bunch. They are some of the most intolerant and hateful people who spew all they spew in the name of tolerance and love. 

The left seems to be the epitome of what Paul was talking about when he spoke about the reprobate sinners in Romans, chapter 1.

The worst part is they truly think they are the tolerant ones and you are the hateful bigots. But unfortunately, If there is any hope, it is that iron still sharpens iron. But don't expect any sharpening happens without some sparks flying.

And in all your doing, if you see from your position on the right that those on the left look like the reprobate in Romans, chapter 1, be careful not to see yourself as righteous simply because you believe the correct things.

In all your being right, you must always strive to act loving and to be gracious. You aren't dealing just with the people. You're dealing with collective mindsets (and, if you can hear it, with principalities and powers in heavenly places). You need to be better in your hearts and attitudes as you become the iron that sharpens other iron.

You need to be the better person because you don't want to be the person that Paul talks about in Romans, chapter 2.

Enter your text here...

Read More
Nurse Practitioner speaks out about why the death rate is so high in New York City Hospitals

Are Coronavirus Patients Being Murdered in New York City?

Are Covid-19 patients being "murdered" in NYC hospitals during this crisis?

If you run a blog long enough, or even if you're just someone who digs long and hard about certain things, you become a lightning rod for getting stuff sent to you from your "fans." And I got one of those "things" sent to me last night. It is a video about that asks "Are Covid-19 patients being murdered in New York City?"

Yup. The headline says "murdered."

Ok. As it turns out, not "murdered," exactly. You see, the woman doing this video on youtube is speaking for someone else; and second-hand information always needs to be filtered and questioned.

And we all see "clickbait" headlines in a lot of blogging these days.

But here is why I give her a pass on the word "murdered."

Pretty quickly she tells you that she is a) speaking out for someone working in the hospitals in NYC, and b) that the person she is speaking out for specifically said, "murdered."

Still, maybe "murder" is not a fair word to use. But what about "dying of negligent homicide?"

I'm not arguing about the semantics here. But I'm sure the people being accused of murder in this video would.

Murder is a pretty strong accusation. It seems to be cause for libel. In fact, I think even negligent homicide is pretty harsh.

I will get to that later. But first, you need to watch the video. 

I did. And having actually watched the video and heard what her testimony is, it opened my eyes to a possible understanding about why...

the death rates from Covid-19 are SKYROCKETING in New York City as compared to most other places in the country.

My assessment of this testimony leads me to believe it is an actual nurse conveying a message from another actual nurse.

I'm NOT speaking specifically about the medical science discussed in the video. I'm not a "doktorb" so I can't say for sure.

What I mean by "legitimate" is that this young lady is very credible and articulate. I don't think testimony like this could be given by someone unless they are rather well educated in the use and functions of lungs and ventilators. Just sayin'.

So I'm thinking what we have here is a real nurse or nurse-practitioner conveying a message from another nurse friend who really is seeing some disturbing things going on in the hospital(s) in New York City.

And she is  crying out for help in spreading a message out of a total lack of any understanding about anything else she can do except "get the word out."

But please. Give a listen to this yourself.

Now, I'm posting the link to this video on YouTube here. But due to things I've noticed happening before, I'm not sure how long the video will stay there. The woman talks about a video that was published to youtube by Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell and has since been remove. 

That video, I saw. And THAT video, I can no longer find on YouTube. So why it disappeared, I don't know.  (I've written elsewhere about another video that disappeared and why - Dr. Erickson in California and why his video was banned from YouTube.)

But for now, you can watch this one on YouTube if you wish. It's the same one I loaded up above. 

So let's clear some things up here, shall we?

Point number one:

I don't know who this lady is in the video. I wish I did, but I have no idea.

She sounds entirely credible. What I mean is, she's either an incredibly good actor and able to memorize medical jargon and spew it double-time in a totally natural fashion, or, more likely, she really is what she says she is.

Point number two:

The lady in this video is NOT "Karlee Sunshine."

It's an important point to make. You see, "Karlee Sunshine" is a flat-earther with about 3,300 followers on YouTube. And if you don't know, I'm not exactly a fan of the "flat earth theory." I've written about it elsewhere on the blog, if you're curious. 

Point number 3:

I don't want to get too carried away on the fact that the woman who posted the video is a "flat-earther."

I know some of my readers lean that way and I don't want them to miss the fact that on the topic in this post, we're probably much on the same page, whether planted on pillars or floating on a ball in space.

Anyway.... As I often say, even a broken clock is right twice a day. And just because I think the person who posted this video is waaaaay off on the configuration of the earth, it doesn't mean I can dismiss what this other lady says about Covid-19.

And I have no reason to expect that the lady in the video is a flat-earther. But it's irrelevant to the point. So please set that aside, no matter your beliefs on Karlee Sunshine, ok?

So, is this woman credible? Is her story plausible?

Let me take some time here to give you "The Cognitive Man" take on this. Because there are a few things to consider here.

I can imagine that some of this craziness could actually be going on. I'm probably about mid-range on the conspiracy index. I've written about other things (and more to come) but I have to think what she says in the video is entirely possible.

Could someone really be scared about losing their job coming out about this kind of thing?

Uhhhh, well..... what do YOU think?

Even in normal circumstances, when a nurse challenges a doctor, it is a high stakes game, I would think.

There are reputations at stake. And lawsuits if they're wrong. And even if it's not an issue of reputation, there are still some doctors have HUUUUUUGE egos. And that along with the power and authority structures in hospitals makes for a powder keg if you're the nurse "blowing the whistle."

So I get the reason for the anonymity.

Think "Juanita Broadderick and Bill Clinton," and ask yourself if it's credible she fears for her job? I think so.

But is it fair to call this "murder?" Is it even fair to call it "negligent homicide?"

Well, let's explore that a bit, shall we?

Because the problem is that even though the numbers seem to be coming out in some places indicating that the original models about the mortality and hospitalization rates on this thing were likely highly flawed, it's still NEW GROUND.

This is, after all, called a "novel virus" for a very good reason.

There is a very thoughtful post on "MedScape" about this whole issue and how doctors are discovering that the treatment protocol for Covid-19 is turning out to be a much different animal than they thought at first.

You can click on this screenshot below to watch the video and read the transcript.

Link to MedScape interview with Cameron Kyle-Sidell, MD

MedScape interview with Cameron Kyle-Sidell, MD

So what is the takeaway from this?

I guess the first thing I would say is that it is often said in military circles, “No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.”

Listen to this video collective and analysis from the New York Times. Very informative about what is going on in treatment and the concerns from all sides of the "medical fences."

So, when all is said and done, is it fair to label this as "murder?" Or even "negligent homicide?"

Well, as far as the murder accusation goes, let's just say, "no."

It's an unfortunate thing she said that. You see, the biggest problem is that 

murder implies intent. And that is a pretty heavy accusation, now, isn't it?

So, what about negligent homicide?

Well, maybe. But who are you gonna charge?

Who is in charge? How much pressure are they under? If you were fearful for your own life in a situation with a pandemic like this, do you think you would always get everything right? Woud you never get scared? Would YOU never make a bad decision while running on a chronic lack of sleep and constant adrenaline and caffiene for weeks on end?

This is a war. And every battle plan works like magic until the first shot is fired.

It's maybe not a cops and robbers movie. The action isn't always split-second like in a good made-for-Netflix drama series.

But the medical professionals are overworked and under-slept. They have to answer for every intubation and every death. And often, the people on the floor maybe DON'T care.

Maybe some of the medical professionals are not really all that professional.

I don't know. I have to say what this lady says in this video is plausible; I have to allow for a reality that says some of them don't care.

But, as is usually the case, those front-line workers are not the ones who make the executive decisions. Often, they're following orders. Sometimes, there aren't enough of the right people around to make the decisions.

And sometimes, decisions are driven by fear, by ego and by protocols that don't fit a novel virus.

And sometimes, years of neglect in a system set it up for a fall.

Maybe the Bronx situation with Covid-19 is a result of poverty and neglect.

There is an article at ABC News entitled, "Poverty, pollution and neglect: How the Bronx became a coronavirus 'formula for disaster.'"

The Bronx has the highest fatality rate per capita in New York City. It's just a fact. And the Bronx is very poor. (And it's highly populated by minorities. So there are going to be some people who go there, too, which is too bad. Because this isn't about race. But it is about poverty and years of bad management, maybe?)

From the article....

The first thing Dr. Ernest Patti noticed when he stepped into the emergency department at St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx for his weekend shift was the sound. An unusually loud cacophony of beepers, alarms and the mechanical gasps of ventilators filled the air.

The morning before one shift, he recorded a video on his phone where he appears shaken and can be heard saying, "We're gonna have to decide who gets one and who doesn't." The hospital managed to make it through the weekend with enough ventilators and has since been sent more, Patti said. But the ordeal left an indelible mark on him.

That's some pretty heavy stuff. There ARE some places where they are overwhelmed and under-equipped.

More from the article.

"Are we shocked that the rates are higher in the African American [and] Latino community? We know that there's inequality in the health care system. We know that the poorer communities often pay the highest price for these types of emergency situations because they're really just bringing to light that systemic racism and discrimination in the system."

So, let me give you the "Cogny Mann" take on the "murder" charge.

This isn't a time to get angry at anyone. It's time to get angry with the situation, and to be as supportive as we can.

You might be a little "uncaring" or neglectful, too, if you were in their shoes.

Be thankful for good healthcare if you have it. Learn to be less judgemental about those who might not always get it right.

What this lady is talking about in this video seems to be real problem. But God help us all if we don't see a time when we need to BE THE CHURCH.

If you read my blog, you'll know that I always want to make room for God to show Himself strong. I'm a firm believer that prayer changes things.

No. It's NOT murder. But it IS killing people. 

But this isn't a time to judge. You don't stand in their shoes. But you can get on YOUR knees. And pray.

Read More

Implausible Denial About Islam

I remember when the Oklahoma beheading incident took place, back in September of 2014. At the time, I, like many others, was posting things on FaceBook as they came across my newsfeed about this incident. Many people reacted to it with horror. Many more reacted with disbelief. Some thought it was a hoax.

This surprised me a little. After all, FaceBook has a tendency to filter your friends list down to people somewhat predisposed to thinking like you. Obviously it doesn’t always do that; but birds of a feather, ya know. I’ve had a lot of people “unfriend me” over the years and a whole bunch block me, too. I kind of figured by that point the ones that were left thought a lot like I did about this stuff. So, I was surprised at the reaction and the number of people who told me they thought it was “nothing.” Many insisted it must have been an isolated incident, and CERTAINLY not related to Islam, like they were spinning it on the TV to be something it really wasn’t – maybe for ratings, or who know what other reason.

Now, I remember one friend on Facebook reacting to it by saying it was “part of the conspiracy to brainwash us and make us afraid.” But I’ve since found out that he is one of a large handful of “facebook friends” I have who also believes in a flat earth; so, in retrospect, I shouldn’t have been so surprised that he reacted to this the way he did. It seems to me that anyone who believes the earth is flat (especially his flavor of this concept) is not the best at deductive reasoning. I love him dearly, nonetheless. But he just wasn’t buying into it, regardless of the news reports out of Oklahoma.

Some People Think Nothing Is As The Media Tells Us

He thinks the whole world is different than the way it is presented to us by “the powers that be.” He thinks we are bombarded consistently by a narrative from the media about the way things are in the world that is designed to distract us from reality. (Not an EXACT quote, but close enough to say it’s the EXACT IDEA he introduced to the conversation.) And there are people who think it’s a hoax; and that this, like everything else, is a zionist conspiracy to lie to people and manipulate them. (There is no end to stupid, it seems….)

Ironically, I agree with him. I just see a much different reality and a much different narrative presented by the media to mask that reality than he does.

For the record, I don’t believe in a flat earth. And I don’t think that everything promoted on the media is done by people bent on keeping us slaves to buying more stuff. There are too many differences of opinion about various things and too many competing interests for it to be controlled that tightly.

But I do believe media people have predispositions (like everyone else) that can’t help but “filter” what they promote as newsworthy and what they downplay or ignore, simply because they fail to connect the dots the same way I do. And since the media seems to be ruled by liberals, and since liberals tend to want to silence the opposition because it’s the easiest way to quench ideas that disagree with them, they tend to lean the same way on a lot of things. They just don’t let anybody else into the club to play the game, if they can help it.

They mostly leaned the same way on this one, also.

But seeing it as a spin to say that the government hyped this to justify the war on ISIS seems totally opposite to the way the government usually spins things on the “radical Islam” issue. My observation is that they seem to go out of their way to say that it’s not Islam; that Islam is a “religion of peace.”

And quite frankly, I’m on a bit of a mission here to convince people that the government and law enforcement spin was wrong, and they you to see it my way. Because, I’m right. (I’m entitled to an opinion like everyone else, right?)

I still maintain that I was right about the Oklahoma beheader. He was not just a whack-job going off in an incident of workplace violence. It was violence in the workplace. But it wasn’t just a guy who who was mad as hell and just couldn’t take it anymore.
The guy who beheaded the woman at work was a devout Muslim convert. And he was not a lone wolf; at least, not ideologically, anyway.

And I can already hear the backlash oozing in my direction, both from the liberals who may by chance read this article and the well-meaning and more peaceful Muslims who believe Islam is truly and only a “religion of peace.”

It’s not. It’s a religion of conquest as much as a religion of peace. You can spin it and spiritualize it all you want to say jihad is about the internal struggle with your sin nature or something. But Mohammed’s direct associates continued a campaign of killing and mayhem after he died. And they were doing what they were doing because they believed the prophet had THAT as his intention. As much as Christians look to the early disciples who spent three years with Jesus to be the best reference point for understanding who Jesus was and what his message was, it is fair to look to Mohammed’s followers for the same understanding of what THEY thought Mohammed’s message was all about.

Please here me. I understand there are moderate Muslims out there who read the Quran in a way that they feel is both consistent and peaceful. (See, for instance, this link: They would see it as a religion of peace, unless war is justified. And while I would say to them that I see the bulk of Islamic scholarship disagreeing with them that Islam is a religion of “live and let live, each and everyone equals,” I commend them for “finding” this message in the Quran. I don’t see it; but I’m not from that background and I will defer to their better judgement. They, in the end, answer to almighty God for how they live, and if they truly want for us all to live in peace, I stand with them in that desire.

So, since peaceful Muslims are Muslim and I am not, I would let them have their say on the issue. I wouldn’t want them telling me what Christianity is all about, and not letting me respond; unless, of course, they can show me from the bible where they get their points. If they did and I saw it necessary to agree with them that they interpreted the bible properly and I did not, I would do well to admit that they had it right and I had it wrong. And I should do that, even if they don’t believe my book.

We all need to bow our knee to truth, no matter how it comes to us or by whom it comes.

But I’ve also said it before, and I will stand by the statement: these ISIS fighters find THEIR message in the same Quran; they find a different message in the book than does the peaceful Muslim. And they do not find that message in the book because they believe it LESS; they find it there because they read it carefully, earnestly and with a dedicated effort to follow what they believe it says. I would dare say that the radical Muslim often has a higher level of belief in the integrity of the Quran than many moderate Muslims who pick a message of peace out of the book, disregarding the gnarly bits they don’t like.

As I’ve also said before, calling ISIS radical Islam is, in my opinion, like calling the Pope a radical Catholic. That’s the point. They do what they do BECAUSE they feel that the Quran TELLS them to do what they do.

I Wish The Oklahoma Beheader Was A Lone Wolf

But ideologically speaking, the facts never seemed to support that position for anybody but the people who WANTED that to be the case. There have been enough of these, with the same patterns, the same knee-jerk reactions of the media to try to drive a false dichotomy between the actions of these people and “the religion of peace.”

What about the Nidal Hasan, the psychiatrist in the army who shot up a bunch of soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009? What about the guy in Ottawa who shot and killed the soldier guarding the tomb of the unknown soldier? What about the guy who ran down the two soldiers in Quebec? What about the couple in California who killed all the people in the community center?

If Only They Could Be Lone Wolves. But There Are SO MANY That It’s Hard To Picture Them As ALONE.

People WANT the Oklahoma guy to be a lone wolf, the Ottawa guy another lone wolf, the California folks another couple of lone wolves; they want them to be people who don’t believe in true Islam; they want these to be workplace violence issues, or mental health issues, or disenfranchised maniacs who are deceived about the message of the Quran and “wrongly read a peaceful book” as inciting violence.

In short, they WANT it to be something – ANYTHING – that will allow them to be able to hide in their bubble and be able to feel safe by rationalizing that this is NOT something that could affect them. In the end, I believe this rationalization about Islam as always being a religion of peace and the idea that every TRUE Muslim is a peaceful Muslim is a desire to be able to feel safe and comfortable – to not have to recognize the size and scope of a problem gaining on us like a velociraptor in the rear view mirror on a casual Sunday drive through Jurassic Park.

You identify wolves as a species when you can see enough of them to identify that they have a set of identifiable characteristics.

If it’s workplace violence, then it must have been some altercation between them. I can handle that because I don’t deal with any crazies in my workplace. That lady might have died, but he was crazy. So the head being lopped off was due to craziness, not Islam. So, because I don’t know any crazies where I work, and Islam is a religion of peace, I’m still safe. It “couldn’t” happen to me.

If it’s a terrorist attack, that’s usually in a crazy place like the Middle East. THEY have crazy people. (Keep in mind they’re muslim nations, but STILL… that’s over THERE.) Yeah, these “lone wolf” attacks in the US are “crazies,” too. But they’re so rare. They’re “lone wolves.” I’m still good.

Nothing to worry about. Yet.

So We Just Hold Our Breath And Hope It Goes Away.

The fact is that even if these people are “lone wolves” in the sense that none of them ever got direct marching orders from ISIS, they are all singing from the same song sheet. They all march to the beat of the same jihadic drummer in their heads. The common thread here is that they all believe what they believe because they believe that it is in the Quran and they are required to follow that book; and THAT book, RIGHT NOW, is telling them in our country, we are the infidel and we need to convert or die.

And until we get past the mentality that says we need to think of all the peaceful Muslims as the REAL Muslims and the radical Muslims as the “NOT REAL Muslims,” we are never going to be able to embrace the true problem here.

I love Muslim people.

I really do. I know some, and the ones I know, as far as I know, want peace. They want to co-exist. They are warm people. They are passionate about what they believe, but want PEACE. They hate ISIS and what it is doing, corrupting what they believe is a peaceful book, when it is rightly interpreted.

But seeing the real problem – this real problem that ISIS believes the same book, but interprets it differently – is the first step in fixing the problem. We need to focus on getting this message out until people stop believing what they WANT to believe about it, and start to acknowledge the depth and breadth of the problem.

Because the ones who see the “radical” message in the book are already acting in faith and religious fervor with an eye on the end-game. And we haven’t even learned what the rules are. We need to learn fast – and learn on our knees – how to love like Jesus loved so they can see the difference between the true and the false, or we are going to get creamed before we even get in the game.

(Last updated 2016-07-09 by The Cognitive Man)
Read More